Archive

IN POST NDAA AMERIKA, WHAT IS A TERRORIST AND WHO CAN MAKE YOU DISAPPEAR BY CALLING YOU ONE?

Since corporate fascist puppet president Barack Obama signed the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 into law this past New Year’s Eve (NDAA: Public Law 112-81), the powers of indefinite detention claimed under the post-9/11 Authorization for Use of Military Force Act (AUMF: Public Law 107-40) have been codified. Now the mere suspicion of being a “terrorist” is sufficient grounds for an American citizen – on American soil – to be arrested and detained indefinitely without charge or trial. Obvious questions of constitutionality aside, this should prompt at least the cautious to ask questions like the following:

1. What is the legal definition of “terrorist”?

2. Who can make you disappear by calling you one?

To answer the first question, we searched the online version of the United States Code – “the codification of the general and permanent laws of the United States” – for a definition of “terrorist”. And to our amazement, we didn’t find one. Over 400 references to “terrorist” in the USC, yes. But a specific definition, no. What we did find is this:

Title 8 Section 1182(a)(3)(B) defines “terrorist activity” but not “terrorist”:

(iii) “Terrorist activity” defined As used in this chapter, the term “terrorist activity” means any activity which is unlawful under the laws of the place where it is committed (or which, if it had been committed in the United States, would be unlawful under the laws of the United States or any State) and which involves any of the following: (I) The highjacking or sabotage of any conveyance (including an aircraft, vessel, or vehicle). (II) The seizing or detaining, and threatening to kill, injure, or continue to detain, another individual in order to compel a third person (including a governmental organization) to do or abstain from doing any act as an explicit or implicit condition for the release of the individual seized or detained. (III) A violent attack upon an internationally protected person (as defined in section 1116(b)(4) of title 18) or upon the liberty of such a person. (IV) An assassination. (V) The use of any – (a) biological agent, chemical agent, or nuclear weapon or device, or (b) explosive, firearm, or other weapon or dangerous device (other than for mere personal monetary gain), with intent to endanger, directly or indirectly, the safety of one or more individuals or to cause substantial damage to property. (VI) A threat, attempt, or conspiracy to do any of the foregoing. (iv) “Engage in terrorist activity” defined As used in this chapter, the term “engage in terrorist activity” means, in an individual capacity or as a member of an organization – (I) to commit or to incite to commit, under circumstances indicating an intention to cause death or serious bodily injury, a terrorist activity; (II) to prepare or plan a terrorist activity; (III) to gather information on potential targets for terrorist activity; (IV) to solicit funds or other things of value for – (aa) a terrorist activity; (bb) a terrorist organization described in clause (vi)(I) or (vi)(II); or (cc) a terrorist organization described in clause (vi)(III), unless the solicitor can demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence that he did not know, and should not reasonably have known, that the organization was a terrorist organization;

(V) to solicit any individual – (aa) to engage in conduct otherwise described in this subsection; (bb) for membership in a terrorist organization described in clause (vi)(I) or (vi)(II); or (cc) for membership in a terrorist organization described in clause (vi)(III) unless the solicitor can demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence that he did not know, and should not reasonably have known, that the organization was a terrorist organization; or

(VI) to commit an act that the actor knows, or reasonably should know, affords material support, including a safe house, transportation, communications, funds, transfer of funds or other material financial benefit, false documentation or identification, weapons (including chemical, biological, or radiological weapons), explosives, or training – (aa) for the commission of a terrorist activity; (bb) to any individual who the actor knows, or reasonably should know, has committed or plans to commit a terrorist activity; (cc) to a terrorist organization described in subclause (I) or (II) of clause (vi) or to any member of such an organization; or (dd) to a terrorist organization described in clause (vi)(III), or to any member of such an organization, unless the actor can demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence that the actor did not know, and should not reasonably have known, that the organization was a terrorist organization. (v) “Representative” defined As used in this paragraph, the term “representative” includes an officer, official, or spokesman of an organization, and any person who directs, counsels, commands, or induces an organization or its members to engage in terrorist activity. (vi) “Terrorist organization” defined As used in this section, the term “terrorist organization” means an organization – (I) designated under section 1189 of this title; (II) otherwise designated, upon publication in the Federal Register, by the Secretary of State in consultation with or upon the request of the Attorney General or the Secretary of Homeland Security, as a terrorist organization, after finding that the organization engages in the activities described in subclauses (I) through (VI) of clause (iv); or (III) that is a group of two or more individuals, whether organized or not, which engages in, or has a subgroup which engages in, the activities described in subclauses (I) through (VI) of clause (iv).
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1182

As used in this chapter- (1) the term “international terrorism” means activities that- (A) involve violent acts or acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State, or that would be a criminal violation if committed within the jurisdiction of the United States or of any State; (B) appear to be intended- (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and (C) occur primarily outside the territorial jurisdiction of the United States, or transcend national boundaries in terms of the means by which they are accomplished, the persons they appear intended to intimidate or coerce, or the locale in which their perpetrators operate or seek asylum; (2) the term “national of the United States” has the meaning given such term in section 101(a)(22) of the Immigration and Nationality Act; (3) the term “person” means any individual or entity capable of holding a legal or beneficial interest in property; (4) the term “act of war” means any act occurring in the course of- (A) declared war; (B) armed conflict, whether or not war has been declared, between two or more nations; or (C) armed conflict between military forces of any origin; and (5) the term “domestic terrorism” means activities that- (A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State; (B) appear to be intended- (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and (C) occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States.

(d) Definitions As used in this section- (1) the term “international terrorism” means terrorism involving citizens or the territory of more than 1 country; (2) the term “terrorism” means premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents; (3) the term “terrorist group” means any group practicing, or which has significant subgroups which practice, international terrorism; (4) the terms “territory” and “territory of the country” mean the land, waters, and airspace of the country; and (5) the terms “terrorist sanctuary” and “sanctuary” mean an area in the territory of the country- (A) that is used by a terrorist or terrorist organization- (i) to carry out terrorist activities, including training, fundraising, financing, and recruitment; or (ii) as a transit point; and (B) the government of which expressly consents to, or with knowledge, allows, tolerates, or disregards such use of its territory and is not subject to a determination under- (i) section 2405(j)(1)(A) of the Appendix to title 50; (ii) section 2371 (a) of this title; or (iii) section 2780 (d) of this title.

I’m no attorney and I don’t play one on television. But after reading the above, it seems to me that the short answer to the question “What is the legal definition of terrorist?” is “That depends.”

Now on to the second question: Who can make you disappear by calling you one?

According to the Washington Post’s TOP SECRET AMERICA project, there are “45 government organizations (for example, the FBI) engaged in top-secret work [that can] be broken down into 1,271 sub-units (for example, the Terrorist Screening Center of the FBI).” I’m pretty sure they can. But they also mention “4,058 government organizations involved in domestic counterterrorism and homeland security” including 2,880 federal organizations that work at the state level, such as the FBI’s Joint Terrorism Task Forces (JTTFs), plus 818 state and 360 local organizations. I’m pretty sure they can, too. And then of course there’s the “1,931 companies engaged in top-secret work for the government.” I’d wager some or all of them can, as well.
http://projects.washingtonpost.com/top-secret-america/articles/methodology/

And that’s not all. We also have to consider the Nationwide Suspicious Activity Reporting Initiative (NSI):

Using NaSI SARs (Suspicious Activity Reports), just about anyone can drop the dime the makes you disappear: a hateful former spouse, a jealous or jilted lover, that co-worker you’re always competing with, or maybe just a nosey neighbor. All they have to do is fill out one of these forms and click “Submit”:

FASCISM ANYONE? THE 14 DEFINING CHARACTERISTICS OF FASCISM BY DR. LAWRENCE BRITTOriginally published in the Spring 2003 edition of Free Inquiry Magazine

Dr. Lawrence Britt has examined the fascist regimes of Hitler (Germany), Mussolini (Italy), Franco (Spain), Suharto (Indonesia) and several Latin American regimes. He found 14 defining characteristics common to each:

1. Powerful and Continuing Nationalism – Fascist regimes tend to make constant use of patriotic mottos, slogans, symbols, songs, and other paraphernalia. Flags are seen everywhere, as are flag symbols on clothing and in public displays.

2. Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights – Because of fear of enemies and the need for security, the people in fascist regimes are persuaded that human rights can be ignored in certain cases because of “need.” The people tend to look the other way or even approve of torture, summary executions, assassinations, long incarcerations of prisoners, etc.

3. Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause – The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe: racial, ethnic or religious minorities; liberals; communists; socialists, terrorists, etc.

4. Supremacy of the Military – Even when there are widespread domestic problems, the military is given a disproportionate amount of government funding, and the domestic agenda is neglected. Soldiers and military service are glamorized.

5. Rampant Sexism – The governments of fascist nations tend to be almost exclusively male-dominated. Under fascist regimes, traditional gender roles are made more rigid. Divorce, abortion and homosexuality are suppressed and the state is represented as the ultimate guardian of the family institution.

6. Controlled Mass Media – Sometimes to media is directly controlled by the government, but in other cases, the media is indirectly controlled by government regulation, or sympathetic media spokespeople and executives. Censorship, especially in war time, is very common.

7. Obsession with National Security – Fear is used as a motivational tool by the government over the masses.

8. Religion and Government are Intertwined – Governments in fascist nations tend to use the most common religion in the nation as a tool to manipulate public opinion. Religious rhetoric and terminology is common from government leaders, even when the major tenets of the religion are diametrically opposed to the government’s policies or actions.

9. Corporate Power is Protected – The industrial and business aristocracy of a fascist nation often are the ones who put the government leaders into power, creating a mutually beneficial business/government relationship and power elite.

10. Labor Power is Suppressed – Because the organizing power of labor is the only real threat to a fascist government, labor unions are either eliminated entirely, or are severely suppressed.

11. Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts – Fascist nations tend to promote and tolerate open hostility to higher education, and academia. It is not uncommon for professors and other academics to be censored or even arrested. Free expression in the arts and letters is openly attacked.

12. Obsession with Crime and Punishment – Under fascist regimes, the police are given almost limitless power to enforce laws. The people are often willing to overlook police abuses and even forego civil liberties in the name of patriotism. There is often a national police force with virtually unlimited power in fascist nations.

13. Rampant Cronyism and Corruption – Fascist regimes almost always are governed by groups of friends and associates who appoint each other to government positions and use governmental power and authority to protect their friends from accountability. It is not uncommon in fascist regimes for national resources and even treasures to be appropriated or even outright stolen by government leaders.

14. Fraudulent Elections – Sometimes elections in fascist nations are a complete sham. Other times elections are manipulated by smear campaigns against or even assassination of opposition candidates, use of legislation to control voting numbers or political district boundaries, and manipulation of the media. Fascist nations also typically use their judiciaries to manipulate or control elections.

With NDAA 2012 in place and EEA in process to control its citizens, and HR 658 enabling DHS WAASS Skynet drones to surveil the skies, America’s corporate-controlled Congress now shifts its focus to fast-tracking cyberfascism.

Sections 1021 and 1022 of the National Defense Authorization Act For Fiscal Year 2012 (NDAA: Public Law No: 112-81) codify the executive (civilian agency e.g. CIA/DHS/FBI) authority to arrest and hold indefinitely without charge or trial American citizens – indefinite detention – as claimed by Presidents Bush and Obama pursuant to the post-9/11 Authorization for Use of Military Force Act (AUMF: Public Law 107-40), and add to that authority the “option” of military detention as well. And although President Obama assured in his signing statement that his administration would refrain from exercising their military options, Presidential signing statements are merely political documents with no force of law or penalty for breach. Besides, once the Enemy Expatriation Act is passed (EEA: HR 3166/S 1698), should an American citizen’s rights become an obstacle our government will be able to simply revoke their citizenship (naturalized OR native born):
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h112-3166

With NDAA in place and EEA in process to control the citizenry on the ground, the corporate fascist elite that controls our government and others next looked to secure the skies. They accomplished that on Valentines Day, when their puppet President Obama signed HR 658 into law and thereby authorized the release of up to 30,000 drones into American air space and enabled the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Wide Area Aerial Surveillance System (WAASS) – a “1984 Meets Terminator” Big Brother Skynet domestic surveillance nightmare that we could not end:

So with the real world firmly under their control, our corporate fascist masters now look to dominate the virtual. And in eager pursuit of that aim, the otherwise seemingly gridlocked Democrats and Republicans in our House and Senate have been showering each other with wave after wave of bipartisan support for so-called “anti-piracy”, “anti-pornography”, “cyber crime”, “cyber intelligence” and “cyber security” bills which taken together put us on a global fast-track to “cyber fascism”. In our previous advisories we warned you about the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA), Protect IP Act (PIPA), Protecting Children from Internet Pornographers Act (PCIPA), and the recently-unveiled Cybersecurity Act of 2012 (S 2105). To that laundry list of Orwellian euphemisms and acronyms – some of which have been delayed, but NONE of which are dead – we now add five more bills you’d be wise to track:

WORLD WAR WEB ADVISORY #4: S. 2105 CYBERSECURITY ACT OF 2012 A.K.A. THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK

Before eyes not blinded by a mainstream media controlled by the corporate fascist elite, Orwell’s 1984 nightmare continues to unfold as the powers and reach of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) are once again extended and codified.

“Introduced Tuesday, the Cybersecurity Act of 2012 [S 2105] would direct the Department of Homeland Security to work in concert with industry members and relevant government agencies to conduct a series of risk assessments and determine which private-sector firms would be deemed to operate “covered critical infrastructure,” a crucial designation that would determine whether a private-sector entity could be subjected to new regulatory oversight.”

“The legislation would codify some of the authority the Obama administration has granted the Department of Homeland Security over federal civilian agency IT security and create the National Center for Cybersecurity and Communications [NCCC] within DHS, headed by a Senate-confirmed director, to coordinate federal efforts to battle cybersecurity threats facing the government and the nation’s critical information infrastructure, the mostly privately owned networks that control the flow of money, energy, food, transportation and other vital resources that the economy needs to function.”

“The Cybersecurity Act of 2012 would have the Department of Homeland Security determine what qualifies as critical infrastructure and require compliance with a set of security standards. The legislation defines as critical infrastructure systems ‘whose disruption from a cyberattack would cause mass death, evacuation, or major damage to the economy, national security, or daily life’.”

MEDFORD, OREGON – On Monday 13 February 2012 at Noon in Vogel Plaza there will be a demonstration against the passing of the NDAA, including Wake Up America Southern Oregon, and Occupy Coalition of Ashland, Medford, and Grants Pass, as well as concerned individuals across the political spectrum.

The indefinite detention clauses (sections 1021 and 1022) within this year’s National Defense Authorization Act (signed into law 31 December 2011) are a direct attack upon the civil rights of all Americans, and represent another step taken toward eroding the freedoms which lay at the foundation of our society.

The detention sections of the NDAA begin by “affirm[ing]” that the authority of the President under the Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF), a joint resolution passed in the immediate aftermath of the September 11th 2001 attacks, includes the power to detain, via the Armed Forces, any person “who was part of or substantially supported al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners,” and anyone who commits a “belligerent act” against the U.S. or its coalition allies in aid of such enemy forces, under the law of war, “without trial, until the end of the hostilities…”. The text also authorizes trial by military tribunal, or “transfer to the custody or control of the person’s country of origin,” or transfer to “any other foreign country, or any other foreign entity.”[1]

After signing the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 into law, President Obama issued a statement on it that addressed “certain provisions that regulate the detention, interrogation, and prosecution of terrorism suspects.” In the statement Obama maintained that “the legislation does nothing more than confirm authorities that the Federal courts have recognized as lawful under the 2001 AUMF. I want to clarify that my Administration will not authorize the indefinite military detention without trial of American citizens.”[1] The only provision from which U.S. citizens are exempted here is the “requirement” of military detention. For foreign nationals accused of being members of Al Qaeda, military detention is mandatory; for U.S. citizens, it is optional. This section does not exempt U.S citizens from the presidential power of detention [by the military OR civilian agencies such as the CIA/DHS/FBI etc.]: only from the requirement of military detention.[2]

A demonstration uniting groups and individuals from across the political spectrum will be held on the 13th to show that united we can begin to stand up to the problems which face us as a nation and a people. Please join us in standing up for justice and freedom.

“A group full of conservatives, Libertarians, and Tea-party members by the name of Wake Up America Southern Oregon is proud to unite with the Southern Oregon Occupy Movement to take a Bold Stand against the National Defense Authorization Act known as the NDAA. Further, it is time that ‘We the People’, all of us unite!” – Joseph Snook, Wake Up America Southern Oregon

“Occupy Ashland is standing with libertarians, progressives, conservatives and the Tea-Party alike to speak out against the attack against our civil rights which is the National Defense Authorization Act. In times such as these, when the injustices of a system and a government become too large to ignore, it is vital that we stand together not as members of a political party but as fellow citizens and human beings to defend our precious freedoms.” – Emery Way Occupy

Cross-Partisan Concern about NDAA includes:

Jeff Landry (R-La) “The NDAA … includes provisions which allow the President to hold any individual associated with terrorist forces in “detention under the law of war without trial until the end of hostilities.” While these provisions do mention certain protections for American citizens, the language defining these exemptions could be interpreted a number of ways – some good and some providing no protection of our rights.” http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/civil-rights/209527-rep-jeff-landry-r-la

ACLU: “The statute is particularly dangerous because it has no temporal or geographic limitations, and can be used by this and future presidents to militarily detain people captured far from any battlefield.” http://www.aclu.org/blog/tag/NDAA

DEMAND THAT PRESIDENT OBAMA VETO H.R. 658 AND SCRUB THE DHS WIDE AREA AERIAL SURVEILLANCE SYSTEM (WAASS) IT ENABLES

Known to the clueless as the “FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012”, but recognized by the concerned as the “Skynet Surveillance Enabling Act of 2012”, H.R. 658 is now hovering at the White House just one corporate fascist puppet presidential signature away from authorizing the filling of America’s skies with as many as 30,000 “1984 Meets Terminator” Big Brother Police State citizen surveillance drones:

We are calling on all Americans to click the “Submit a comment” link for H.R. 658 on this White House Pending Legislation page and demand that President Obama veto H.R. 658 and scrub the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Wide Area Aerial Surveillance System (WAASS) it enables:

As Breach of Oath carries no penalty for our elected officials in Washington, they are understandably more accountable to the global corporate fascist elite and Citizens United Super PACs who fund their campaigns than they are to the people who elect them. Consequently, as with NDAA 2012 Obama will most likely sign the bill regardless of whatever protests are raised. But at least we will have yet another documented instance of his collusion with Congress in the ongoing criminal Seditious Conspiracy that is transforming the American Republic into the Amerikan Reich at an ever-accelerating pace.

MAKE WAY FOR WAASS: H.R.658 ACCELERATES DRONE DEPLOYMENT FOR SURVEILLANCE OF AMERICAN CITIZENS

Perhaps emboldened by the impotence of the ACLU, BORDC, Center for Constitutional Rights, “Oath Keepers” and other toothless rights watchdogs, as well as the inability of the Occupy Movement to break through the corporate-controlled mainstream media blackout of efforts to “Undo NDAA”, yesterday H.R. 658 – euphemistically entitled the “FAA Air Transportation Modernization and Safety Improvement Act” – sailed through the U.S. Senate (75-20-5) and is now headed to the White House where our corporate fascist puppet President Barack Obama is expected to swiftly sign it into law:

As were Sections 1021 and 1022 of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012 – which despite Obama’s signing statement and other claims to the contrary do in fact codify the indefinite detention without charge or trial of American citizens on American soil – tucked neatly away in H.R. 658 (and likely never read by most of our lobbified legislators) is Section 320, officially summarized as follows:

“Requires the FAA Administrator to: (1) develop plans to accelerate the integration of unmanned aerial systems [drones] into the National Airspace System, and (2) report to Congress on progress made in establishing special use airspace for the DOD to develop detection techniques for small unmanned aerial vehicles and to validate sensor integration and operation of unmanned aerial systems. Directs the DOD Secretary to establish a process to develop certification and flight standards for military unmanned aerial systems at specified test sites.”

With that exposed, a more fitting moniker for H.R.658 might be the “Skynet Surveillance Enabling Act of 2012”. According to USA Today, “Drones, perhaps best known for their combat missions in Afghanistan, are increasingly looking to share room in U.S. skies with passenger planes… Now, organizations from police forces searching for missing persons to academic researchers counting seals on the polar ice cap [are] eager to launch drones.” In more specific and less candy-coated terms, once the Wide Area Aerial Surveillance System – or WAASS (think Skynet) – drone surveillance network enabled by H.R.658 is in place, privacy in real as well as virtual space will become a thing of the past as Big Brother will be able to spy on just about anyone doing just about anything just about anywhere in the United States or elsewhere. As the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) stated:

“The primary objective of WAASS is to provide persistent, long-term surveillance over urban and rural terrain at least the size of 16 km2. The surveillance system shall have an electro-optical capability for daylight missions but can have an infrared capability for day or night operations. The sensor shall integrate with an airborne platform for data gathering. The imagery data shall be displayed at a DHS operations center and have the capability for forensic analysis within 36 hours of the flight.”